If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Am I reading this correctly?

I was reading that an "employee of a government agency" can qualify for a CCW permit, and I happened to read up on a few brothers-in-arms who applied for theirs and got it without question here in California.

I am currently trained by the USAF to carry an M9, M4 and M16 (M4/M16 with or without M203 grenade launcher ) and was wondering if this statute applied to me as well.

...be an employee of a governmental agency who is authorized by law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of, or the incarceration of any person for any violation of law...

Does this apply to military law as well? We're held to higher standards...

...meet the standards, if any, established by the agency that requires employees to regularly qualify in the use of a firearm...

I have to qualify on each one of these weapons every 18 months...

...by carrying photographic identification issued by the government agency...

I have a "DD Form 2" which is also called a "Common Access Card/US Military I.D." that can get me on to ANY military or USG installation.

In a sense, we've been trained by the USG and last time I checked, the USG trumps statutes as well...

Maybe I'm a bit on my hinges with this topic, and if it's been brought up before, I do apologize ahead of time.

If someone could clear this up, it'd be AWESOME!

Last edited by DooFster; 03-16-2011 at 05:52 PM.

IT is better to have a gun on you and NOT need it, than to need a gun and NOT have it on you...

I was reading that an "employee of a government agency" can qualify for a CCW permit, and I happened to read up on a few brothers-in-arms who applied for theirs and got it without question here in California.

I am currently trained by the USAF to carry an M9, M4 and M16 (M4/M16 with or without M203 grenade launcher ) and was wondering if this statute applied to me as well.

I would just use a little caution if you do CC using this law as your reason. You could still be arrested by uninformed LEO who disagree with your opinion. Do some research talk to an attorney and let us know what you find. I'm sure others would love to know.

So what you're saying is that I CAN do this, provided I get it completely verified and run-through with my military lawyers or someone of the same equivalent? Obviously, if the local Sheriff likes me, then the chances of me doing it are POSSIBLY better...

IT is better to have a gun on you and NOT need it, than to need a gun and NOT have it on you...

well,,,

Originally Posted by DooFster

So what you're saying is that I CAN do this, provided I get it completely verified and run-through with my military lawyers or someone of the same equivalent? Obviously, if the local Sheriff likes me, then the chances of me doing it are POSSIBLY better...

are you asking for permission to apply for the CPL?
are you asking if you are authorized to CC without a CPL?

neither question needs to be answered.
every californian should apply for a concealed carry permit!
the rate of denial is way low, because nobody thinks they will be approved.
you just might be pleasantly surprised.

EMNofSeattle wrote: Your idea of freedom terrifies me. So you are actually right. I am perfectly happy with what you call tyranny.....

“If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin.”

Stand up for your Rights,, They have no authority on their own...

All power is inherent in the people,
it is their right and duty to be at all times ARMED!

I may not NEED to answer, but I'm going to answer "yes" on "...carry without CCW..." simply because I'm AD and am held to higher laws (aka federal laws that trump statutes). Not saying I'm GOING to do it; I just want to check to see if I can throw this 'card' if things get a little hairy...

IT is better to have a gun on you and NOT need it, than to need a gun and NOT have it on you...

I may not NEED to answer, but I'm going to answer "yes" on "...carry without CCW..." simply because I'm AD and am held to higher laws (aka federal laws that trump statutes). Not saying I'm GOING to do it; I just want to check to see if I can throw this 'card' if things get a little hairy...

If I were you I would look at the LEOSA as an option. I would spend some time researching the ins and outs of the law. Not just the law itself but the case law that applies to it also. After spending enough time studying and learning the law I would seek out a knowledgable attorney in this aspect of the law and spend some money for the attorney to go over every aspect of this law.

Having spent time doing research before siting down with an attorney should speed up the process.

Once you confirm on your own AND with an attorney that you ARE in FACT covered by the LEOSA then it would NOT be some card to throw out in a hairy situation. You will be within the law and will conduct yourself accordingly.

If you choose to OC at an event or just because. you will still be restricted to ALL local laws. Meaning mostly unloaded open carry outside of school zones.

If you do qualify and you have a LEO encounter I would provide only the bear minimum requirements to stay within the law. I would remain silent and invoke my normal rights.

Understand you may still be arrested even if you are covered by LEOSA.

This is just my advise. The criminal charges that you would face if a LEO did not agree are of the MOST serious. If you miss calculate you could loose your gun rights forever!

I was reading that an "employee of a government agency" can qualify for a CCW permit, and I happened to read up on a few brothers-in-arms who applied for theirs and got it without question here in California.

I am currently trained by the USAF to carry an M9, M4 and M16 (M4/M16 with or without M203 grenade launcher ) and was wondering if this statute applied to me as well.

Does this apply to military law as well? We're held to higher standards...

I have to qualify on each one of these weapons every 18 months...

I have a "DD Form 2" which is also called a "Common Access Card/US Military I.D." that can get me on to ANY military or USG installation.

In a sense, we've been trained by the USG and last time I checked, the USG trumps statutes as well...

Maybe I'm a bit on my hinges with this topic, and if it's been brought up before, I do apologize ahead of time.

If someone could clear this up, it'd be AWESOME!

I think you are only reading a small portion of the requirements. You simply showed requirement #1. In order to qualify, you must meet all 8 requirements.

When you refer to "military law as well", are you inidicating that you are a military law enforcement officer?

From the website you linked to:

In order to be “a qualified law enforcement officer” under the LEOSA, a person must meet the following requirements:

1. Be an employee of a governmental agency who is authorized by law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation or prosecution of, or the incarceration of any person for any violation of law;

2. Have the statutory powers of arrest;

3. Be authorized by the agency to carry a firearm;

4. Not be the subject of any disciplinary action by the agency;

5. Meet the standards, if any, established by the agency that require employees to regularly qualify in the use of a firearm;

6. Not be under the influence of alcohol or any intoxicating or hallucinatory drug;

7. Not be prohibited by federal law from possessing firearms;

8. Be carrying photographic identification issued by the governmental agency identifying the individual as a law enforcement officer.

1. Be an employee of a governmental agency who is authorized by law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation or prosecution of, or the incarceration of any person for any violation of law;

I am Active Duty USAF and can prevent violations of federal and military law...

2. Have the statutory powers of arrest;

In a sense I do...I can detain someone if they're violating military laws...

3. Be authorized by the agency to carry a firearm;

I AM authorized to carry an M9, M16, and M4...

4. Not be the subject of any disciplinary action by the agency;

I'm subject to the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice)...and I am not under any disciplinary action...

5. Meet the standards, if any, established by the agency that require employees to regularly qualify in the use of a firearm;

I have to qualify on the three above-mentioned firearms every 12-18 months, and just before deployments...

6. Not be under the influence of alcohol or any intoxicating or hallucinatory drug;

I am subject to random drug testing...

7. Not be prohibited by federal law from possessing firearms;

Please refer to #3 above...

8. Be carrying photographic identification issued by the governmental agency identifying the individual as a law enforcement officer.

My military identification is enough, and if they have a someone-functional brain in their head, they'd understand that we are held to much-tougher standards...

So if you look at it in another light, I AM qualified under each of the 8 requirements.

Last edited by DooFster; 03-18-2011 at 02:53 PM.

IT is better to have a gun on you and NOT need it, than to need a gun and NOT have it on you...

Doof, please correct me if I missed it, but I don't think you've stated anywhere that your duties in the AF are directly related to Law Enforcement; i.e. an SP.

It hasn't been discussed much on this forum, but on other forums where I've seen LEOSA discussed the general consensus seems to be that it might apply IF your current duty assignment is specifically law enforcement. If it's not - and that's what it sounds like to me via you're vague answer with regard to LEO credentials - I think you would be taking a huge risk to think that LEOSA applies to you.

The only people in the AF, that I'm aware, who have such credentials are AFOSI.